To echo the article by Sophie Gremaud published on April 2 in your newspaper about the FCC (future circular collision), I send you a few words about the presentation evening (like April Fools, Laughter less) organized by CERN.
It was impeccable: promoting the well prowled project and uninhibited propaganda. In the presentation, there was a question of reasonable option and practically invisible installation on the surface.
Following which the intervention of a well -informed auditor will teach us that the figures presented as those of the final realization (for the diameter of the tunnel, etc.) are in fact those, much lower, of preliminary studies. In the official presentation, the question of millions of tonnes of excavation with the tens of thousands of trucks of 16 tonnes necessary for their evacuation as well as the inevitable enlargement of small municipal roads, and the undoubtedly irremediable impact it will have on a still preserved campaign, is never mentioned.
The second part entitled Public Information and Population Participation is just as perplexed. From the whole of the Assembly, only three residents of Presinge had received the information from the CERN signaling this session. The announced all-household never arrived, it was residents of Presinge themselves who posed posters the last minutes.
The disturbing questions remain unanswered: that concerning the confiscation of the democratic law of opposition to the FCC-the competence being passed from communal to federal by a sleight of hand which allows the CERN to trample today the federal law on agricultural land–gives rise to a bushy but out-of-subject response. The presenters have never heard of the proven pollution of the waters of the current collision. Another pirouette for a question questioning the ethics of such excess at a time when the awareness of the finitude of resources is essential.
On the other hand, they are inexhaustible to rent this project described as futuristic: it is a question of producing knowledge, level of competition, to continue knowledge.
It is now the thought itself that we seek to confiscate … because we know that a collective of nearly 400 scientists condemns this project that he considers exceeded by the object of his research, by the chosen framework focused on an obsolete market logic, as by the denial of the climate question.
Claude Schaeppi Borgeaud,
Presections (GE)
